The writer’s face should be red from embarrassment for this mysterious use of a plural (instead of the possessive celebrity’s) on Yahoo! Makers:
Imagine people snapping up pictures of a mural. Don’t you wonder who took those pictures and how folks acquired them? The writer at Yahoo! DIY doesn’t offer us any hints:
Well, that would be wrong. He offers us one hint: He included an extra word, changing the word for taking a photo (snapped) with an idiom for quickly acquiring something (snapped up).
This would be humorous if it weren’t so sad. The writer for Yahoo! News manages to cram a lot of embarrassing goofs into a single sentence:
It seems the writer is averse to using a spell-checker (not unlike all Yahoo! writers). He may also be averse to technology. He certainly has a bit of confusion about adverse (which means harmful or unfavorable) with averse (which means strongly disinclined).
But I’m not the only one who thinks that this writer needs a refresher course in basic English. Here are just a few of the comments made by readers of the article:
I wonder if one of the humorous anecdotes has to do with the poor spelling and proofreading of this article.
I see Yahoo is hiring 10 year old illiterate grade school dropouts again who lack any and all knowledge of spelling, proper punctuation, and more importantly, proof reading skills.
Eric Pfeiffer needs to go back to grammatical school.
Eric Pfeiffer needs to go back to 3rd grade composition and learn to PROOFREAD.
OK, since Yahoo obviously doesn’t employ editors, allow me: First, it is spelled “humorous”, not “humerous”. Secondly, the proper phrase is “technology AVERSE”, not “adverse”. And there is no hyphen between them.
How about some editor earning his paycheck?
“technologically-adverse” It’s “averse,” and it shouldn’t be hyphenated. To which another commenter added:
You’re chastising someone that is literary averse who will never understand.The guy does work for Yahoo after all.
I know people with Downs Syndrome who write better than Eric Pfeiffer.
If something costs more than $30,000, it’s in excess of that amount. If you have $30,000 more than you need, that’s an excess of 30 grand. If you confuse the two idioms, you probably write for Yahoo! News:
It must be a writer’s dream to work for a “news” organization that doesn’t require facts or accuracy of any kind from its “journalists.” Imagine being able to spell words any way you want. Imagine hearing something in a video and then transcribing it phonetically — without regard to the actual spelling of words. Imagine trying to spell the car model known as a Celica and coming up with this:
Imagine you work for Yahoo! News. How easy a gig is that?
What is it about Yahoo! News? Why are the standards for writing soooo low? Why are grammatical errors, typos, misspellings, and worse of all, factual errors, tolerated?
Why do writers working there fail to understand the difference between some homophones, like there and their?
Does this look right to you?
Collecting data from 1.7 cases probably isn’t going to give you statistically significant results. You probably need data from at least 2 cases. Or maybe more like 1.7 million cases. What a difference a missing word makes!
And what a difference an unnecessary word — even a small one — makes to the reader:
When it comes to following the laws of grammar, these writers are felons. They just don’t realize that when placed between two numbers, a hyphen means “to” or “through,” not “and,” which is the word the writer should have used instead of the hyphen:
This is what passes for journalism on Yahoo! News.
It’s hard to imagine how a hotter Africa would be more inhabitable, but that’s what it says on Yahoo! News’ “The Sideshow”:
Ha-ha! The writer has just pulling your leg. Of course, much of Africa would become uninhabitable because of increased temperature. The “journalist” was obviously having a little fun at the expense of the truth.
Where was the writer’s mind when he wrote this for Yahoo! News‘ “The Sideshow”?
Bottles, not labels, have shoulders. But that’s not the worst of that sentence. The writer provided a handy-dandy photo of the labels so you can see “black on white color schemes” for yourself:
That looks like a white-on-black color scheme, but maybe it’s just me.
Anyhoo, it seems that someone named Popcorn Sutton (who’s known by the nickname Marvin), was a moonshiner. At least that’s what it says in this excerpt from the article:
Isn’t that weird? I would have thought that his real name as Marvin and his nickname was Popcorn. But nooooo. Those quotation marks indicate his nickname. I’m guessin’ that Popcorn Sutton sold his brew in Mason jars (or at least that’s what the rest of the world calls them).